Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Darran Davis with Councillor Corthorne substituting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Darran Davies with Councillor Phillip Corthorne substituting.

None.

There were no declarations of interest.

RESOLVED: That the minutes from the meeting on 14 March 2024  be approved.

RESOLVED: That the minutes from the meeting on 14 March 2024  be approved, subject to noting Councillor Adam Bennett’s attendance.

None.

None.

It was confirmed that all items would be heard in Part I.

It was confirmed that all items would be heard in Part I.

Conversion of the first floor and loft space to create 3 x 2-bed and 1 x 1- bed flats with ground floor extension for relocation of existing Chandlery

Recommendations: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer recommendation subject to the information in the addendum.

Conversion of the first floor and loft space to create 3 x 2-bed and 1 x 1- bed flats with ground floor extension for relocation of existing Chandlery

Officers introduced the application, highlighted the information and provided a verbal update on the conditions in the addendum making amendments to conditions 4 and 8. Officers took Members through the plans and made a recommendation for approval.

The petitioner was not in attendance at the meeting.

The agent addressed the Committee and highlighted that that applicant had worked with officers to create a well-considered proposal for a modest roof extension to accommodate four flats within an underutilised office space. The new windows would face away from residential properties and would overlook the marina creating a scenic view. The proposal ensured that surrounding residents were not unduly harmed as it took into account any impacts of loss of light, loss of privacy and overlooking. It was submitted that the development would integrate well with current settings, there were no highway objections and the new flats would benefit from close proximity to the Willowtree open space and nearby retail facilities. Local plans and national planning guidelines required that there was effective use of land and encouraged the use of underutilised and under developed sites to maximise potential. The subject site sat outside the boundary of the nearby nature conservation site.  The Committee was asked to grant approval for the planning application in line with officers’ recommendation.

In response to Member queries regarding the elevations, it was confirmed that there was no raising of the actual ridgeline, two small dormers were proposed and there was an amendment to a form of gabled roof which was noted in the report.

In terms of parking, it was noted that the application site was based within an underutilised car park. Members were advised that parking was compliant with policies and detailed consideration had been given by planning officers in conjunction with highways officers. 

The Committee considered that there was no harm to the green belt.

The officers’ recommendation, was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer recommendation subject to the additional condition and informative and amendments to conditions 4, 8 and 12 in the addendum and verbal update.

Partial demolition of ground floor space to the rear of number 38, and amalgamation of number 36/38 to form a larger and more coherent retail unit on the ground floor. Partial demolition of ground floor space to the rear of number 34 to facilitate the erection of a single storey E-Use workshop building. New external staircase to retained upper floor residential units. Shop front to retail to remain as existing.

Recommendations: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendation.

Partial demolition of ground floor space to the rear of number 38, and amalgamation of number 36/38 to form a larger and more coherent retail unit on the ground floor. Partial demolition of ground floor space to the rear of number 34 to facilitate the erection of a single storey E-Use workshop building. New external staircase to retained upper floor residential units. Shop front to retail to remain as existing.

Officers introduced the application and made a recommendation for approval.

A representative on behalf of the Northwood Residents Association (NRA) addressed the Committee and stated that the proposal did not enhance the retail offering in Green Lane and damaged the heritage asset. It was submitted that planning permission should be refused. Historically the pavement was the first section of shops to be completed and it was noted that the proposed site was in the conservation area and therefore needed to be protected. The proposal was for the retail space to be halved in the primary retail area in Northwood, to be replaced by a workshop which was out of character. Although the workshop would have the same use class it would not be a shop. DMHB1 was highlighted to the Committee  and it was stated that the Council would expect development proposals to avoid harm to the historic environment, would only be supported where it sustained and enhanced the significance of the heritage asset and it would not lead to a loss of significance or harm. It was submitted that the harm being proposed outweighed any minimal public benefit and would not make a positive contribution to the local character and distinctiveness of the area. It was submitted that the application was substantially the same as the application previously refused and the concerns regarding fire vehicle access remained. It was noted that 34 Green Lane was one of the few businesses that provided an ADA approved toilet facility and was able to do so due to the depth of the current unit. Concerns were raised regarding the cumulative impact this development would have and there was  prospect of more applications on the same parade. The NRA took the view that the proposal was not sympathetic to the local character and the current site deserved to be protected. If consent was granted there was no going back, and the Committee was asked to refuse planning permission.

Further information was provided on the retail in that specific area of Northwood during Members questions to the NRA representative.

Members discussed the cumulative effect of the proposed development and noted that each application was considered on its own merits. Officers explained that the preference was not to lose any retail space, however after reviewing the application with the policy team there were no sustainable refusal reasons on the grounds of cumulative impacts on retail.

The Committee was advised to consider the application before it and that any land ownership matters were separate from planning considerations. Officers were unable to dictate the type of business  ...  view the full minutes text for item 78.

Demolition of the existing detached, single dwelling and the erection of a building consisting of 9 no. two-bedroom flats, with associated parking and amenities.

Recommendations: Refusal

RESOLVED: That the application be refused as per officer recommendation

Demolition of the existing detached, single dwelling and the erection of a building consisting of 9 no. two-bedroom flats, with associated parking and amenities.

Officers introduced the application and made a recommendation for refusal.

A petitioner in objection to the proposed development addressed the Committee and referred to a photograph as part of their presentation. It was requested that the application be refused due to its overwhelming nature, loss of privacy to neighbouring properties and concerns that a precedent would be set for future applications. The petitioner furthermore stated that 90 Long Lane had residential properties on both sides and there was a concern for how the trees would be impacted in the conservation area. The proposed development was not in keeping with the character of the area and would change the look of the village. The petitioner raised issues with overlooking, noise pollution and how the development would impact the scenery and dynamics of the area. It was emphasised that there should be less building and construction in conservation areas. The proposed development would cause increased traffic congestion, additional cars and footfall in the area. The Committee was asked by the petitioner to refuse the application due to the increased number of residents causing noise pollution, overshadowing, loss of privacy and visual impact on neighbouring properties.

During Member clarification questions to the petitioner, it was noted that the photograph demonstrated the car congestion already in the area and the significance of the trees and the bearing they had on the local character of the area.

Highways officers confirmed that there were concerns regarding the position of the gate that provided access to the property and the pedestrian and cycle access.

The Committee welcomed the officers report and the officers’ recommendation, was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be refused as per officer recommendation.

Temporary redevelopment of the site to provide a single storey temporary modular classroom (Use Class F1)

Recommendations: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendation.

Temporary redevelopment of the site to provide a single storey temporary modular classroom (Use Class F1)

Officers introduced the application and made a recommendation for approval.

During Member discussions it was confirmed that a wooden screening was being proposed in terms of the fencing. It was noted that a Construction Logistics plan had been submitted that considered construction on the main site and the application had been reviewed by the Council’s Highways officer as acceptable. Given that this is a temporary permission for a time limited period of 24 months, a new application would need to be considered if the proposed modular building was needed for further time.

The officer’s recommendation, was moved, seconded and unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendation.

Variation of Condition 2 (Approved Plans) of planning permission ref. 60653/APP/2022/531, dated 10-03-23 (Erection of no. 4 x two storey terraced houses and no.2 x two storey semi-detached houses, with associated car parking and landscaping works) to alter footprint and design of Plot 5 to accommodate fully accessible dwelling to meet M4(3) technical specification.

Recommendations: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendation.

Variation of Condition 2 (Approved Plans) of planning permission ref. 60653/APP/2022/531, dated 10-03-23 (Erection of no. 4 x two storey terraced houses and no.2 x two storey semi-detached houses, with associated car parking and landscaping works) to alter footprint and design of Plot 5 to accommodate fully accessible dwelling to meet M4(3) technical specification.

Officers introduced the application and made a recommendation for approval.

The officer’s recommendation, was moved, seconded and unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendation.